Blog

The Supreme Court of Canada’s decision in Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia, 2026 SCC 16, marks a significant legal development: the recognition of a tort of family violence that captures coercive and controlling behaviour extending beyond isolated incidents. For family law professionals, this recognition aligns with long‑standing clinical and practice‑based understanding. Harm in family relationships is often cumulative, relational, and embedded in patterns of interaction rather than discrete events.What Ahluwalia does not do, however, is require every family‑law‑adjacent process to become an adjudicative forum. Those of us who have worked in family violence for decades know that preventing further harm often turns less on re‑litigating the past than on how post‑separation processes are designed and managed. Parenting coordination, when properly structured, is not a new mechanism of control. It is a way of removing fuel from the fire—by implementing court‑ordered parenting arrangements without creating fresh opportunities for coercion, escalation, or ongoing child exposure to conflict.As my practice of parenting coordination has matured, experience has made one point increasingly clear: effectiveness depends on restraint. Parenting coordination works when it remains neutral, tightly bounded, and implementation‑focused—structuring communication and decision‑making in accordance with existing orders, rather than assessing conduct, documenting behaviour for future litigation, or enforcing compliance. Its legitimacy and durability lie in containment, not adjudication.<h3>Parenting Coordination Is Not Adjudication</h3>Parenting coordination files may involve findings or allegations of family violence. Where that is the case, the Parenting Coordinator’s role is not to determine whether family violence occurred, to revisit historical allegations, or to make findings the court has not made. Those determinations rest exclusively with the judge.The Parenting Coordinator’s mandate is narrower and forward‑looking: to assist with the implementation of existing court orders or agreements in a structured, neutral, and child‑focused manner, and to manage the parenting coordination process so that it does not itself become a source of ongoing harm. The focus is not on the past, but on whether current parenting dynamics—and the parenting coordination process—are consistent with the court order and capable of supporting the child’s safety, stability, and relationships as ordered by the court.Parenting coordination is a dispute‑resolution and implementation process. It is not a fact‑finding, investigative, or therapeutic function. <h3><span style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Designing a Process That Does Not Perpetuate Harm</h3>Family violence is not static. In post‑separation parenting relationships, conflict may evolve into behaviours such as chronic delay or non‑responsiveness, gatekeeping or interference with the child’s relationship with the other parent, repeated non‑compliance framed as “protection,” or use of the parenting coordination process itself to prolong engagement or exert control.My role is not to label or re‑characterize these behaviours. Instead, it is to assess whether current patterns of interaction comply with the court order, and whether the structure of the parenting coordination process can be adjusted—within the scope of my authority—to reduce escalation and prevent the process itself from becoming harmful. Where process adjustments are insufficient, the matter must be returned to court. <h3><span style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Managing Power Imbalances Through Structure, Not Interpretation</h3>High‑conflict and violence‑adjacent files often involve complex power dynamics. One parent may exercise indirect or procedural control, while the other may respond with heightened reactivity rooted in perceived or actual threat. Neutrality is not achieved by interpreting motives. It is achieved through structure.To remain effective, I rely on clearly defined, rule‑based processes that limit informal or open‑ended engagement. Communication parameters, timelines, and formats are applied consistently. This constrains the space in which power imbalances can operate, without requiring psychological interpretation or adjudication. Consistent with professional standards and subject to the governing order and law, I remain attentive to indicators of family violence. Any screening or process‑related safeguards operate alongside—not in place of—court oversight. <h3><span style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Shuttle and Separate Processes as Containment Tools</h3>In files involving intimidation, escalation, or performative conflict, joint sessions are often inappropriate. Separate or shuttle processes are not a concession; they are a containment strategy. The objective is forward progress and child protection, not comfort, reconciliation, or relational repair.Where I determine that the parenting coordination process is being used to sustain conflict or control, or that I can no longer manage the interactional dynamics within the scope of my authority, I have a professional obligation to withdraw and return the matter to court. Ending parenting coordination may, in some cases, be the most child‑protective step available. <h3><span style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Capacity, Not Labels, Guides Process Design</h3>The statutory definition of family violence under the Family Law Act is intentionally broad. Many high‑conflict parenting disputes will engage elements of that definition without requiring the Parenting Coordinator to make findings or apply labels.My work is guided by two practical considerations: the impact of current behaviours on the child and on the parenting relationship as ordered by the court, and each parent’s demonstrated capacity to comply with boundaries, follow structured processes, and engage in child‑focused implementation. Where capacity is limited or inconsistently demonstrated, the scope and structure of parenting coordination may be adjusted accordingly, within the limits of the appointment. <h3><span style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Clinical Support as Parallel, Not Substitution</h3>Parenting coordination is not therapy. It cannot resolve trauma histories or regulate unmanaged emotional responses within the session itself. In some cases, individual counselling or other clinical support may be recommended or required by court order as a parallel intervention. The distinction matters. Parenting coordination manages process and implements orders. Clinical professionals support regulation, insight, and recovery. This separation preserves neutrality and allows parenting coordination sessions to remain business‑like, contained, and forward‑looking.<h3><span style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Transparency as a Safeguard Against Process Abuse</h3>Contained processes require clarity. Parenting coordination activities are documented. Objectives are identified. Where determinations are authorized, they are issued with written reasons tied to the governing order. Transparency protects both parents, supports alignment with the court’s authority, and reduces the risk that the process itself becomes a site of control or revisionism.<h3><span style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Determinations as a Limited Implementation Tool</h3>When facilitated resolution fails, delay itself can become harmful to the child’s stability and routine. Where expressly authorized, Parenting Coordinators may make narrow determinations to implement existing orders. These determinations address discrete issues, apply the Family Law Act only as necessary for implementation, and do not vary parenting arrangements or re‑adjudicate best interests. They are implementation tools, not findings of fault. <h3><span style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">When Parenting Coordination Must End</h3>Parenting coordination is not appropriate in every case. If the process is being used to perpetuate control or cannot be corrected within the limits of the appointment, ending the process and returning the matter to court may be necessary. The objective is not cooperation for its own sake. It is a structure that allows the child to experience stability, predictability, and safety, consistent with the court order and free from ongoing parental conflict. <h3><span data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Why Parenting Coordination Still Matters After <em data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(24px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Ahluwalia</h3>After Ahluwalia, there is understandable concern that implementation‑based processes might inadvertently reinforce coercive control. Poorly designed processes can do exactly that. Properly designed parenting coordination does the opposite.By narrowing conflict, reducing decision fatigue, and imposing structure where chaos has become the norm, parenting coordination removes the conditions that keep conflict and nervous‑system activation alive. It does not adjudicate harm, but it can prevent its continuation. Parenting coordination does not ask parents to be fixed. It asks the system to stop feeding the fire.That containment is not therapeutic. It is procedural, regulatory, and profoundly child‑protective. That is why parenting coordination remains not only compatible with Ahluwaliau, but essential in its aftermath.Written by Cori L. McGuire, a Parenting Coordinator since 2008 and a &nbsp;family law lawyer since 1998 in British Columbia. For further reading try <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/when-family-violence-makes-parenting-coordination-non-viable" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/when-family-violence-makes-parenting-coordination-non-viable">When Family Violence Makes Parenting Coordination Non‑Viable</a><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">&nbsp;or <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/parenting-coordination-in-family-violence-cases" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/parenting-coordination-in-family-violence-cases"><span data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Parenting Coordination in Family Violence Cases</a><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">. &nbsp; © 2026 Cori McGuire. All Rights Reserved. Proprietary Workflow.

Containment, Not Adjudication: Parenting Coordination After Ahluwalia v. Ahluwalia

<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Parents often expect immediate involvement from a Parenting Coordinator when a new issue arises. When that does not happen, it can feel confusing or frustrating, especially in high‑conflict situations. In reality, there are times when the most constructive, cost‑effective, and child‑focused approach is for the Parenting Coordinator not to intervene at all. This is not avoidance. It is intentional, disciplined practice. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Understanding when and why a Parenting Coordinator waits can help parents avoid unnecessary cost, reduce escalation, and make better decisions about when to seek help — and when not to.<h3>Parenting Coordination Is a Structured Process, Not Constant Supervision</h3>Parenting coordination is designed to help parents implement existing parenting arrangements, not to supervise every discussion or decision.Parents are generally expected to communicate directly with one another prior to involving the parenting coordinator. The communication protocol provides a clear and safe way to ask the parenting coordinator questions or ask for assistance, but it does not require that every parenting discussion involves the Parenting Coordinator.When parents are communicating directly and no one has asked for assistance, the process is often working as intended.<h3>Not Every Parenting Issue Requires Intervention</h3>Parents frequently explore ideas before knowing whether agreement is possible. For example, one parent may ask about adding a mid‑week parenting time visit after school, or parents may discuss changing a parenting schedule from a 2‑2‑5 arrangement to a 7‑7 rotation for a child.These are not minor logistical details. They are potential changes to parenting time, and they raise important considerations, including a child’s developmental stage, attachment and transitions, school or daycare routines, fatigue and emotional regulation, and the need for stability and predictability.Because these issues are highly fact‑specific, there is no one‑size‑fits‑all rule. What works for one family or one child may not work for another.If parents are discussing these possibilities directly and no one has requested assistance, the Parenting Coordinator will often wait. Premature intervention can unnecessarily increase cost, escalate conflict, undermine parental autonomy, and turn exploratory discussions into entrenched disputes.In practice, this means that when parents are discussing a possible change — such as adding a mid‑week visit or adjusting a parenting schedule — the Parenting Coordinator will often allow that discussion to unfold before stepping in. If the conversation resolves, no professional time is spent. If it stalls, escalates, or one parent asks for assistance, the process then shifts into a structured forum where the issue can be addressed efficiently and safely.<h3>Implementation Versus Change: Why the Distinction Matters</h3>Parenting coordination focuses on implementing existing court orders or agreements. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">An agreement to change parenting time — even by mutual consent — is not implementation. It is a new agreement between parents. Examples include changing a 2‑2‑5 schedule to a 7‑7 rotation or adding new mid‑week parenting time during the school week.If parents agree to a change, they are legally entitled to do so. Such agreements are made under section 6 of the Family Law Act and should usually be recorded, often with the benefit of independent legal advice. The Parenting Coordinator does not approve, endorse, or determine these changes.<h3>When the Parenting Coordinator May Become Involved</h3>If both parents want assistance, the Parenting Coordinator may step in in a facilitative role. This can include helping parents clarify what is being proposed, identifying child‑focused considerations, exploring whether a time‑limited trial might be appropriate, thinking through safeguards and review points, and assisting with clear drafting of terms if requested. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">This is facilitation, not adjudication. Any resulting agreement belongs to the parents.<h3>Why Structured Meetings Are Often the Safest and Least Expensive Option</h3>Some parenting issues are difficult to resolve through written exchanges alone. Tone, misunderstanding, and repetition often increase conflict and cost.For that reason, when assistance is requested, the most effective forum is often a short, structured three‑way call or MS Teams meeting. These discussions are guided by a clear agenda, defined time limits, a focus on child‑centred considerations, and clear ground rules for respectful participation.In practice, these meetings are far less expensive than extended written exchanges and lead to much greater understanding. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">They also provide an emotionally safer structure, particularly in cases involving a history of family violence. The process is controlled, communication is moderated, and the focus remains on implementation and children rather than blame or escalation.<h3>Structure and Communication Rules Are There to Protect Everyone</h3>Structure is not about control. It is about safety, predictability, and efficiency. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Agendas, communication rules, and defined processes reduce emotional escalation, protect parents from reactive exchanges, keep discussions child‑focused, and prevent cost from spiralling. Parents are always free to decline a proposed meeting or structured discussion, and that choice will be respected.It is important to understand, however, that refusing structured forums usually leads to longer written exchanges, greater misunderstanding, increased professional time, and higher overall cost.<h3>What Parents Can Expect</h3>Parents working with me can expect that I will intervene when assistance is requested or necessary, but not simply because an issue exists. I respect parental autonomy where appropriate, use structure strategically to reduce cost and conflict, and remain focused on children’s stability and well‑being.Sometimes the most professional response is to wait, observe, and allow parents the space to resolve matters themselves. That is not doing nothing. It is part of how effective parenting coordination works.Written by Cori McGuire, a Parenting Coordinator since 2008 and a &nbsp;family law lawyer since 1998 in British Columbia. For further articles on the role of the parenting coordinator, read <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/the-framework-of-trust--why-my-professional-boundaries-protect-your-family" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/the-framework-of-trust--why-my-professional-boundaries-protect-your-family">The Framework of Trust: Why My Professional Boundaries Protect Your Family</a> and <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/is-parenting-coordination-a-waste-of-money-when-your-co-parent-won-t-budge" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/is-parenting-coordination-a-waste-of-money-when-your-co-parent-won-t-budge">Is Parenting Coordination a Waste of Money When Your Co-Parent Won’t Budge?</a>, and refer to our <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/resource-library" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/resource-library">Resource Library</a>.&nbsp;© 2026 Cori McGuire. All Rights Reserved. Proprietary Workflow.

Doing Less, Not Nothing: Why a Parenting Coordinator Sometimes Waits

Hand using stethoscope on a teddy bear's back

Last year I volunteered to speak to the Child and Youth Section of the BC Canadian Bar Association to explain whether—and when—I will speak directly with children as a Parenting Coordinator.I have refined my practice since then and this article explains how I approach child involvement, the considerations that guide my decisions, and what happens with any information shared, so that parents understand the process and limits of my role.<h3>A Starting Point: What My Role Is (and Is Not)</h3>As a Parenting Coordinator, my role is to help parents implement existing parenting orders or agreements and to structure consultation and decision‑making where parents are struggling to do so on their own.I am not:<ul><li>a judge,</li><li>a child’s lawyer,</li><li>a counsellor or therapist,</li><li>or a decision‑maker about parenting arrangements.</li></ul>I do not decide where a child lives, how much parenting time a parent has, or what parenting responsibilities should be assigned. Those decisions are made by parents through agreement or by the court.Any involvement I have with a child is therefore limited, careful, and purpose‑specific.<h3>Do I Always Interview Children?</h3>No. In fact, most parenting coordination work does not involve direct interviews with children.In many families—particularly high‑conflict families—speaking directly with a child about parental disputes can unintentionally place the child in a difficult or harmful position. Children often feel pressure to please one parent, fear upsetting the other, or worry that what they say will be used against someone they love.For that reason, I do not routinely interview children, and I do not ask children to choose between parents or express preferences about core parenting arrangements unless instructed to do so by the Court.<h3>What I Consider Before Speaking With a Child</h3>Before deciding whether to speak with a child, I consider several factors, including:<ul><li>the authority granted in the parenting coordination order or agreement</li><li>the child’s age and developmental stage</li><li>the level of conflict between the parents</li><li>whether speaking with the child would assist with implementation, or instead risk increasing stress or loyalty conflict</li><li>whether the issue can be addressed effectively through parental process, indirect information, or professional reports such as a Hear the Child report </li></ul>If speaking with a child would not meaningfully assist with implementing existing arrangements—or would risk placing the child in the middle—I will not do so.<h3>How Children’s Experiences Are Considered Without Interviews</h3>Even when I do not speak directly with a child, a child’s lived experience is often reflected in other, less intrusive ways, such as:<ul><li>school attendance, behaviour, or academic functioning</li><li>medical or therapeutic information shared with appropriate consent</li><li>patterns in transitions, exchanges, or daily routines</li><li>how well existing parenting arrangements are being carried out</li></ul>This information helps me understand how implementation is working in practice, without asking a child to carry responsibility for adult decision‑making.<h3>When I May Speak With a Child</h3>If the parenting coordination order or agreement permits, and if it serves a clear and limited purpose, I may speak with a child about implementation details, not outcomes.This usually occurs after a parenting arrangement is already in place and involves practical matters such as:<ul><li>identifying which exchange times are least stressful</li><li>understanding routines that help a child transition more smoothly</li><li>clarifying where items should be kept to avoid repeated conflict</li><li>learning what helps the child feel prepared and settled within an existing schedule</li></ul>In these situations, the child is not being asked to decide anything. The purpose is to improve how an existing arrangement works, not to change it.<h3>How I Explain My Role to a Child</h3>If I speak with a child, I explain—in age‑appropriate language—that:<ul><li>I am not a judge and do not decide parenting arrangements</li><li>I am not a lawyer for either parent or for the child</li><li>I am not a counsellor</li><li>my role is limited to helping parents carry out existing plans more smoothly</li></ul>I also explain what will and will not be shared, so that the child is not surprised or burdened by the process. Transparency is essential.<h3>How Information From a Child Is Used</h3>Information shared by a child is used only for implementation purposes, such as:<ul><li>adjusting logistics within existing authority informing facilitation between parents</li><li>helping parents understand how their actions affect transitions or routines </li></ul>It is not used to:<ul><li>decide parenting time or parental responsibilities</li><li>support one parent’s position over the other create a record for court</li><li>evaluate parenting capacity</li></ul>If a matter requires changes to parenting arrangements or judicial decision‑making, it must return to court.<h3>Why Restraint Matters</h3>In parenting coordination, doing less can sometimes protect children more.My approach is grounded in the belief that children should not be asked to manage adult conflict or feel responsible for outcomes they do not control. The most effective way to support children is often by structuring adult behaviour and communication, rather than drawing children directly into the process.<h3>Example: Graduated Parenting Time Ordered by the Court</h3>A common situation in which limited direct input from a child may be appropriate arises where the court has already determined the parenting arrangement and has delegated implementation authority to the Parenting Coordinator.For example, a court order may provide that a child is to progress from 25% parenting time to an equal 50‑50 parenting schedule over a defined period, such as six months, with the Parenting Coordinator authorized to manage the pacing and implementation of that transition.In this scenario, the outcome has already been decided by the court. The Parenting Coordinator is not determining whether the child should spend more time with one parent, nor revisiting the allocation of parenting time. The PC’s role is limited to implementing the ordered trajectory in a manner that is workable and sustainable for the child.Where authorized, limited direct contact with the child may assist the PC in assessing implementation strain, such as:• how the child is tolerating longer parenting periods,• whether transitions are becoming more difficult or easier over time,• whether particular routines or exchange times are causing stress, or• whether minor timing adjustments within the ordered framework would support smoother implementation.In such circumstances, the child is not asked to express preferences about where they wish to live or how parenting time should ultimately be divided. The child is advised, in age‑appropriate terms, that the schedule has already been decided and that the purpose of the discussion is to help the plan work better, not to change it.Information obtained through this limited input may be used to:• adjust the pace of steps within the authorized transition period,• refine transition logistics,• inform facilitation with the parents, or• report back to the court, if required, on the progress of implementation.It is not used to recommend a different parenting arrangement or to substitute the Parenting Coordinator’s judgment for that of the court. If implementation difficulties reveal the need for a substantive change beyond the PC’s authority, the matter must return to court.This type of structured, purpose‑specific contact illustrates how a Parenting Coordinator may remain attentive to a child’s lived experience while acting strictly within delegated implementation authority.<h3>A Final Word</h3>Every family is different. Decisions about whether to speak with a child are made case by case, within the limits of the parenting coordination role and the authority granted. If I do speak to young people, it could be in person, using Zoom, MS Teams at first, and subsequent discussions by telephone.If you have questions about how this works in your situation, those questions can be addressed in a structured way within the parenting coordination process.Written by Cori McGuire, a Parenting Coordinator since 2008 and a &nbsp;family law lawyer since 1998 in British Columbia. For further reading on PC processes, try reading <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/the-framework-of-trust--why-my-professional-boundaries-protect-your-family" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/the-framework-of-trust--why-my-professional-boundaries-protect-your-family"><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">The Framework of Trust: Why My Professional Boundaries Protect Your Family.</a>© 2026 Cori McGuire. All Rights Reserved. Proprietary Workflow.

How and When I Speak With Children as a Parenting Coordinator

<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">After almost 30 years working with parents caught in prolonged family litigation, I have come to recognize patterns that are rarely spoken about openly. Not because anyone is hiding them, but because when people are living inside long‑term conflict, it becomes difficult to see what the conflict itself is doing to them.Years of litigation do not simply resolve disputes. They reshape lives. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">They reshape how people think, how they relate, how their bodies respond to stress, and how much internal space remains for anything other than survival. Over time, conflict stops being something parents are dealing with and starts becoming the environment they live inside.When parents remain in an adversarial system for extended periods of time, their nervous systems are under continuous strain. The body adapts to this kind of pressure, because it must. But the adaptation comes at a cost. Chronic stress changes how threat is perceived, how quickly emotions activate, and how difficult it becomes to return to a regulated state once triggered.Over time, parents often become more reactive, more vigilant, and more depleted. This is not a failure of character or resilience. It is the predictable effect of living for years inside unresolved threat. Even people who were once flexible, reflective, and generous with benefit of the doubt can become rigid, defensive, or exhausted. This is not who they are. It is what the conditions have required of them.I see parents whose friendships quietly fall away or change beyond recognition. Relationships that once felt easy become complicated, draining, or unsafe. Some parents withdraw socially altogether because they no longer have the bandwidth to manage one more interpersonal demand. Others find themselves surrounded by people who need something from them but offer little in return. The loss of connection is rarely intentional, yet it is one of the most consistent consequences of prolonged conflict.At the same time, attention fragments. Parents describe being physically present at work or with their children while mentally elsewhere—tracking emails, legal deadlines, past arguments, or anticipating the next dispute. Even highly capable, thoughtful people begin to struggle with focus, creativity, and emotional availability. The longer the conflict continues, the narrower life can feel, as if everything outside the dispute has slowly faded into the background.Something almost always gives.Often, what gives are the very things parents care about most: ease, connection, meaningful work, and time with their children. Not because those things matter less, but because the nervous system can only carry so much threat for so long. When survival takes priority, joy and imagination are often the first casualties.And this is where the idea of “magic” matters.For children, magic does not mean fantasy in the abstract. It means the freedom to play, to imagine, to trust that the world is stable enough to explore. It means having adults around them who are present enough to notice, respond, and delight. When adult conflict consumes too much emotional oxygen, that magic quietly shrinks—not because parents don’t love their children, but because the system they are trapped in leaves too little room for anything else.This is the context in which parenting coordination enters. And it is important to be clear about what parenting coordination is not.Parenting coordination is not therapy. It does not resolve trauma histories, heal past relationships, or fix people. Parents do not come to parenting coordination to be repaired. They come because the conflict has become unmanageable and unsustainable, and because continuing as they have been is costing too much.<h3>What parenting coordination does offer is containment.</h3>It reduces the number of decisions that must be fought over. It narrows the scope of conflict. It creates structure, predictability, and boundaries around issues that have been consuming disproportionate amounts of energy. Instead of every interaction becoming a potential flashpoint, there is a framework that limits how, when, and about what parents must engage.When parents are no longer required to renegotiate every detail of their children’s lives, justify every decision, or brace themselves for every interaction, the nervous system begins to settle. Not because anyone has changed who they are, but because the conditions that required constant vigilance have been reduced.In that regulated space, something important happens. Parents often begin to see things differently. They start to recognize how much energy has been spent on battles that did not meaningfully serve their children. They notice how little time actually remains in childhood, particularly after years have already been lost to conflict. Grief often surfaces here—for what was missed, for how hard things became—but so does clarity.Parenting coordination does not ask parents to give up caring. It asks them to become more selective about what they care about.Many parents reach a point where they understand that the only behaviour they truly control is their own. This is not resignation. It is agency. Letting go of arguments that do not protect children is not weakness. It is an act of preservation—for themselves and for their children.For parents who have lived in litigation for years, the most profound shift is often not behavioural but internal. They stop measuring success by winning, proving, or being right, and begin measuring it by stability, predictability, and presence. The goal becomes not perfection, but sustainability.And when sustainability becomes the goal, something else becomes possible.When conflict quiets, even imperfectly, parents often find they have the capacity to turn back toward their children with more steadiness and less reactivity. They can notice play again. They can tolerate mess, imagination, silliness, and emotion without immediately scanning for danger. They can support their children’s inner world instead of constantly managing external threats.Childhood is finite. Parenting coordination cannot give parents back the years already spent in conflict. What it can do is help stop the loss from continuing. It can protect what remains.You do not need to be fixed to parent well. You need space to breathe, fewer fires to fight, and the opportunity to choose differently going forward.That space is where the magic lives.That is what parenting coordination is designed to support.<h3>Is this research‑based? Is it therapy?</h3>Parenting coordination itself is not therapy, and it does not claim to be. It is a dispute‑resolution and implementation process, typically court‑connected, designed to reduce ongoing conflict and decision‑making chaos in high‑conflict parenting situations.That said, the observations underlying this work are strongly supported by research across multiple disciplines, including:<ul><li>Neuroscience and psychophysiology on chronic stress, threat response, and nervous system regulation</li><li>Developmental psychology on the impact of parental conflict on children’s emotional security and play</li><li>Attachment research on predictability, caregiver availability, and co‑regulation</li><li>Family systems research on how conflict patterns become self‑perpetuating without external structur</li></ul>Parenting coordination does not treat trauma, but it often creates the conditions under which regulation becomes possible—for parents and, indirectly, for children.<h3>How to read more</h3>For parents and professionals who want to go deeper, useful areas of reading include:<ul><li>Research on chronic stress and nervous system regulation (for example, work by Bruce McEwen, Stephen Porges, and Bessel van der Kolk)</li><li>Developmental and attachment research on the role of play, safety, and predictability in childhood</li><li>Family law literature on high‑conflict separation and post‑separation dispute resolution</li><li><a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/co-parenting--it-s-not-done-because-you-like-your-ex" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/co-parenting--it-s-not-done-because-you-like-your-ex">Coparenting: It's Not Done Because You Like Your Ex</a>,&nbsp;<a href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/how-badmouthing-your-co-parent-damages-your-child" data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/how-badmouthing-your-co-parent-damages-your-child">How Badmouthing Your Co-Parent Damages Your Child</a> and&nbsp;other articles in our <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/resource-library" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/resource-library" data-mce-selected="inline-boundary">Resource Library﻿</a></li></ul><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Written by Cori McGuire, a Parenting Coordinator since 2008 and a &nbsp;family law lawyer since 1998 in British Columbia.&nbsp;© 2026 Cori McGuire. All Rights Reserved. Proprietary Workflow.

Making Space for Magic: How Parenting Coordination Helps Children Keep Being Children

<h2><span style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(30px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: var(--head-fontFamily); font-size: calc(30px * var(--head-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--head-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Why Warnings and Cost Allocation Are Required for Fairness, Not Punishment </h2>Parents sometimes experience concern or frustration when warned that Parenting Coordination fees may be reapportioned, including the cost of a determination. These concerns usually arise from a misunderstanding of what reapportionment is and why it exists.Reapportionment of fees, and the warnings that accompany it, are not punitive. They are essential tools that allow Parenting Coordination to function fairly, efficiently, and in a way that protects children from ongoing conflict.Parenting Coordination is a structured, child‑focused dispute‑resolution process designed to implement existing parenting orders or agreements and to resolve day‑to‑day parenting issues. It is not therapy, mediation, or litigation. Its effectiveness depends on parents following the Communication Agreement, engaging in timely, proposal‑based discussions, and participating in good faith in consensus‑building efforts.When that process is followed, most issues can be resolved without escalation. When it is not, additional Parenting Coordination time is required, and that time necessarily has a cost.Under the BC Parenting Coordinator Roster standard participation agreement, parents generally share fees equally at the outset. However, that equal sharing is not absolute. Clause 10.02 of the agreement states:“Subject to the terms of the Authorizing Instruments, or any subsequent Order of the Court or ruling of an Arbitrator, the Parents will share the Parenting Coordinator’s fees, disbursements and other charges equally and the Parenting Coordinator has the discretion to reapportion the payment of fees, disbursements and other charges between the Parents where the Parenting Coordinator determines it is appropriate.”Fees are therefore governed first by the appointing court order or agreement, and second by the participation agreement itself. Reapportionment is not an exception to the process; it is an expressly contemplated feature of it.Reapportionment does not involve findings of fault, moral judgment, or punishment. It is a method of allocating Parenting Coordination time and expense in proportion to how the process is being used. When one parent’s conduct results in delay, repetition, refusal to engage in consensus, resistance to agreed procedures, or escalation that makes a determination necessary, the additional time required may be reapportioned so that one parent is not required to subsidize the other’s non‑compliance with the process.Warnings about possible reapportionment are not threats. They are part of procedural fairness. A warning explains how current conduct is affecting the process, gives the parent an opportunity to adjust their engagement, and avoids surprise cost consequences later. In high‑conflict parenting situations, ambiguity often fuels power struggles. Clear warnings reduce conflict by making expectations and consequences transparent.Parenting Coordination prioritizes agreement wherever possible. Determinations are intended to be a last resort. However, when a determination is required because one parent refuses to engage in consensus without reasonable basis, withholds agreement after explanations have been provided, re‑argues settled process issues, or uses delay or non‑response as leverage, the cost of that determination may be reapportioned. This can include time spent reviewing submissions, analyzing options, applying best‑interest considerations, and drafting and issuing the determination. Reapportionment in these circumstances reflects process use, not the outcome.Parents sometimes point to events that occurred before Parenting Coordination began, such as unilateral decisions or past disputes. While those events may provide background, they do not govern cost allocation once Parenting Coordination is in place. After the process begins, parents are expected to follow the Communication Agreement, raise concerns promptly and constructively, and participate in good‑faith efforts toward resolution. If current conduct causes delay, repetition, or avoidable determinations, the resulting costs arise from that conduct, not from historical events.Reapportionment decisions are guided by the best interests of the child. Avoidable determinations increase conflict exposure and financial strain. By encouraging cooperation, timely engagement, and efficient resolution, reapportionment supports stability and reduces the likelihood that parenting resources will be consumed by unnecessary disputes.Reapportionment may occur where a parent requires repeated coaching on the same issue, rejects explanations and re‑litigates settled process points, refuses to sign reasonable consensus without justification, or forces determinations that could reasonably have been avoided. Reapportionment may be partial or full, may apply to coaching time, dispute‑resolution time, and determination time, and may be revisited if engagement improves.Parents can reduce the risk of reapportionment by following the Communication Agreement, making clear and timely proposals, engaging genuinely in consensus efforts, accepting explanations once provided, and focusing on present decisions rather than past grievances.The bottom line is this: reapportionment of Parenting Coordination fees, including the cost of determinations, is not punitive. It is a fairness mechanism grounded in the appointing order or agreement and the standard participation contract. It is how Parenting Coordination remains balanced, transparent, and workable when cooperation breaks down, and how the process continues to serve the child’s need for stability rather than ongoing conflict.Written by Cori L. McGuire, a Parenting Coordinator since 2008 and a family law lawyer since 1998 in British Columbia. Cori has many other articles on the parenting coordination process including: <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/parenting-coordination-recommendations--what-they-are-and-why-they-matter" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/parenting-coordination-recommendations--what-they-are-and-why-they-matter">Parenting Coordination Recommendations: What They Are and Why They Matter</a>, <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/the--last-chance--review--why-i-might-send-a-handout-right-before-a-decision" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/the--last-chance--review--why-i-might-send-a-handout-right-before-a-decision">The "Last Chance" Review: Why I Might Send a Handout Right Before a Decision</a> &nbsp;and <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/what-happens-to-determinations-when-a-new-parenting-coordinator-is-appointed" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/what-happens-to-determinations-when-a-new-parenting-coordinator-is-appointed">What Happens to Determinations When a New Parenting Coordinator Is Appointed?</a> Further reading by subject is found in our <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/resource-library" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/resource-library">Resource Library</a>.© 2026 Cori McGuire. All Rights Reserved. Proprietary Workflow.

Reapportionment of Parenting Coordination Fees in British Columbia

Vintage telephone and advice card at event

<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">In British Columbia, Parenting Coordination is often misunderstood as a purely decision‑making role. In reality, determinations are only one—and usually the last—tool available to a Parenting Coordinator (PC). Before a dispute reaches that point, many Parenting Coordinators use non‑binding recommendations as part of a structured, transparent process designed to help parents resolve issues themselves and avoid unnecessary determinations.This article explains what Parenting Coordination recommendations are, what they are not, and how they can resolve disputes without coercion.<h2>Where Recommendations Fit in Parenting Coordination</h2>Neither the Family Law Act nor the Family Law Act Regulation expressly authorizes Parenting Coordinators to make recommendations. That is an important point.The legislation provides the framework for family dispute resolution and recognizes Parenting Coordination as a form of dispute‑resolution practice. Any authority a PC has—whether to facilitate, recommend, or determine—comes only from the appointing court order or the parents’ agreement.Within that authorized process, recommendations function as a facilitative tool, not as an exercise of statutory or adjudicative power.A recommendation does not bind the parents. It does not resolve the issue. It does not necessarily become evidence. It simply communicates the Parenting Coordinator’s provisional implementation view, shared openly and in advance, to support informed decision‑making.<h3>When Jurisdiction Is Absent: Best‑Interests‑Informed Input</h3>At times, a Parenting Coordinator may lack jurisdiction under the appointing order or agreement to make a determination on a particular issue. In those circumstances, the absence of decision‑making authority does not require silence or withdrawal from the process. Where consistent with the role of dispute‑resolution practitioner, a PC may provide non‑binding, best‑interests‑informed input to assist the parents’ own decision‑making.This form of input does not purport to exercise statutory authority or to resolve the issue. It is explicitly advisory, grounded in the existing parenting framework, and framed through a best interests of the child lens as contemplated by the Family Law Act. It serves to identify relevant child‑focused considerations, implementation impacts, and foreseeable effects on stability and routine, without directing an outcome or constraining parental choice.Such input respects jurisdictional limits while still advancing the core purpose of Parenting Coordination: helping parents implement existing arrangements in a manner that promotes the child’s well‑being and reduces conflict. If agreement cannot be reached and the issue falls outside the PC’s authorized scope, the matter must be returned to court for determination rather than resolved through the Parenting Coordination process.<h3>Neutrality Does Not Mean Silence</h3>A common concern is that recommendations compromise neutrality or signal that a determination has already been made.Neutrality in Parenting Coordination does not require a PC to withhold all thinking. It requires procedural fairness and non‑alignment, not the absence of judgment.A Parenting Coordinator is expected to:• understand the governing court order or agreement• understand the practical and child‑focused constraints of implementation• form a provisional view of how the issue may be resolved if a determination becomes necessaryWhat neutrality prohibits is advocacy, pre‑judgment without process, or using authority to force agreement.Recommendations, when properly framed, do none of those things.<h3>What Makes a Recommendation Non‑Coercive</h3>The difference between a legitimate recommendation and coercion lies almost entirely in timing and language.A non‑coercive recommendation is:• issued after meaningful consultation, not at the outset• explicitly described as provisional and non‑binding• grounded in the existing order or agreement• open to revision based on further input• shared for the purpose of promoting resolution, not complianceCritically, it is not intended to be interpreted as stating: <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">“This is what I will decide if you don’t agree. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Instead, it is stating: <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">“Based on the information to date and the governing order, this is a likely implementation outcome. I am sharing it now so you can decide whether agreement is preferable to further process.” <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">That framing preserves parental agency.<h3>A Practical Example: The 5‑Minute Midweek Call</h3>A common dispute in Parenting Coordination involves brief communication during the other parent’s parenting time. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">One parent requests a short midweek phone call with the child. The other parent objects, citing boundaries or disruption.After structured consultation, a Parenting Coordinator might issue a recommendation along these lines: <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">Based on the existing parenting order and the information provided to date, a brief midweek call of approximately five minutes appears consistent with supporting the parent‑child relationship while minimizing disruption to the child’s routine. This is a provisional recommendation, not a determination, and is shared to assist the parents in deciding whether agreement is preferable to further process.This recommendation:• does not bind either parent• does not rely on undisclosed information• does not assess credibility• does not threaten a determinationIn many cases, that transparency allows parents to agree—sometimes with minor adjustments—without the need for a formal determination at all.<h3>Why Recommendations Often Reduce Conflict</h3>In high‑conflict parenting situations, ambiguity fuels power struggles. Endless consultation can become a tactic rather than a pathway to resolution.Clear, carefully framed recommendations often reduce coercion, rather than create it, because they:• prevent surprise outcomes• limit process abuse• reduce unnecessary legal expense• make the Parenting Coordinator’s reasoning transparentParents may still disagree—but they are disagreeing with a clearly articulated implementation pathway, not guessing at hidden conclusions.<h3>What Recommendations Are Not</h3>A Parenting Coordination recommendation is not:• a finding of fact• an expert opinion• evidence for court• a substitute for a determination• an exercise of statutory authorityIf agreement is not reached, and the appointing order authorizes it, the matter may then proceed to a formal determination—based on the same governing framework, but issued with binding effect.<h3>The Bottom Line</h3>Parenting Coordination recommendations are not imposed outcomes. They are process tools, used carefully and transparently to support resolution and avoid unnecessary determinations. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">When used correctly, they respect parental autonomy, protect neutrality, reduce conflict, and serve the child’s need for stability—without coercion.If you are involved in ongoing co‑parenting disputes and want to learn whether Cori L. McGuire's method for Parenting Coordination may help, you are welcome to contact her for further information. Written by Cori L. McGuire, a Parenting Coordinator since 2008 and a family law lawyer since 1998 in British Columbia. Cori has many other articles on the parenting coordination process including: <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/the--last-chance--review--why-i-might-send-a-handout-right-before-a-decision" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/the--last-chance--review--why-i-might-send-a-handout-right-before-a-decision">The "Last Chance" Review: Why I Might Send a Handout Right Before a Decision</a><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">&nbsp;and <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/what-happens-to-determinations-when-a-new-parenting-coordinator-is-appointed" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/blog/what-happens-to-determinations-when-a-new-parenting-coordinator-is-appointed" style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">What Happens to Determinations When a New Parenting Coordinator Is Appointed?</a><span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(16px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal); -webkit-text-size-adjust: 100%;">&nbsp; Further reading by subject is found in our <a data-mce-href="https://kelownalawyer.com/resource-library" href="https://kelownalawyer.com/resource-library">Resource Library</a>.© 2026 Cori McGuire. All Rights Reserved. Proprietary Workflow.

Blog

Containment, Not Adjudication: Parenting Coordination Aft...

Doing Less, Not Nothing: Why a Parenting Coordinator Some...

How and When I Speak With Children as a Parenting Coordin...

Making Space for Magic: How Parenting Coordination Helps ...

Reapportionment of Parenting Coordination Fees in British...

Parenting Coordination Recommendations: What They Are and...